, Volume 79, Issue 4, pp 893–907 | Cite as

Malament–Hogarth Machines and Tait’s Axiomatic Conception of Mathematics

  • Sharon Berry
Original Article


In this paper I will argue that Tait’s axiomatic conception of mathematics implies that it is in principle impossible to be justified in believing a mathematical statement without being justified in believing that statement to be provable. I will then show that there are possible courses of experience which would justify acceptance of a mathematical statement without justifying belief that this statement is provable.


Mathematical Knowledge Mathematical Practice Epistemic Justification Mathematical Truth Peano Arithmetic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Alan B. Non-deductive methods in mathematics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.) Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2013 Edn.). <>.
  2. Button, T. (2009). Sad computers and two versions of the church–turing thesis. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 60(4), 765–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Earman, J., & Norton, J. (1996). Infinite pains: The trouble with supertasks (Vol. 11, p. 271). Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  4. Earman, J., & Norton, J. D. (1993). Forever is a day: Supertasks in Pitowsky and Malament–Hogarth spacetimes. Philosophy of Science, 60(1), 22–42.Google Scholar
  5. Etesi, G., Németi, I. (2002). Non-turing computations via Malament–Hogarth space-times. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 41(2), 341–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Frege, G. (1980). The foundations of arithmetic: A logico-mathematical enquiry into the concept of number. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Gödel, K. (1931). Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme I. Monatshefte für Mathematik, 38(1), 173–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hogarth, M. (2004). Deciding arithmetic using SAD computers. The British Journal for the philosophy of Science, 55(4), 681–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kaye, R. (1991). Models of Peano arithmetic, volume 15 of Oxford logic guides. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Rosser, B. (1936). Extensions of some theorems of Gödel and Church. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 1(3), 87–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Tait, W. W. (2001). Beyond the axioms: the question of objectivity in mathematics. Philosophia Mathematica, 9(1), 21–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Harvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations